User talk:Mythril Wyrm
Welcome Hi, welcome to the Civilization Wiki! Probably nobody has yet looked at your edit to the Pacal (Civ5) page. It is live already, but you can expect it to be soon reviewed by one of our more experienced editors. *'Now please take a few minutes to get to know the wiki: some instructions, guidelines and conventions are listed at the Civilization:Community Portal page.' *Then please tell us something about yourself by editing ! At the very least, you should tell people which games you play, using a "User Box" or two or more - see Civilization:Userboxes. *When posting messages to talk pages or forum pages, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ That will automatically expand to your user name with a timestamp. *The page is an excellent way of seeing what's being done right now. *For general discussions and questions about this wiki or any game, see the forums. *You also have that you can use, for example, to share stories about your Civ games and the other games we cover. :) Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Becer (talk) 06:37, February 13, 2014 (UTC) Potential Wikia interview about Civ: Beyond Earth Hello! I was informed about a possibility to ask some 2K folks questions about Beyond Earth and was wondering if you'd happen to have any good ones. See my talk page for details and leave your comments there! —ZeroOne (talk / ) 20:42, May 12, 2014 (UTC) Question Do you have civilization 2 conflicts in civilization. Becuse if you do can you help me edit the scenario section. :I'm afraid I don't. I've only played Civilization IV and Civilization V (and their expansions), hence why I'm focusing on editing the pages for those games. Sorry. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:20, May 30, 2014 (UTC) Categories Hello there! I just noticed you edited a bunch of Civ4 related articles (e.g. like this http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/Ikhanda_(Civ4)?curid=3991&diff=65485&oldid=41735) and added some categories (mainly Category:Civilization IV) to them. I just wanted to point out that it's not at all necessary to edit all those pages individually. Pretty much all of them contain some template, and if you wanted to add a category to all pages about Civ4 units, the only thing you need to do is to edit Template:Unit (Civ4) and add that category there. In the edit I linked to you also added Category:Civilization IV:Warlords, which could also have been automatically added, because the template on that page contains information that the unit was introduced in Warlords. Additionally, I don't know if adding Category:Civilization IV to each and every Civ4 item brings any value at all, since the category would become way too cluttered to be used for navigation or anything else for that matter. The units already belong to Category:Units (Civ4) and that category, in turn, belongs to the Category:Civilization IV. Using subcategories is cool, I don't think everything should be blindly tagged with the main level category. What do you think? Cheers, —ZeroOne (talk) 21:00, June 24, 2014 (UTC) :I think that's a fair point to raise. I noticed that some of the Civilization IV pages belonged to that category while others didn't, so for the sake of consistency, I decided to add the ones that were left out to the category while I made other edits. However, if adding the main level category is redundant and might actually make it harder rather than easier to locate specific pages or information, I'll stop adding it to every page. Thanks for the heads up! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:08, June 24, 2014 (UTC) ::Cool, I'm glad you agree. :) I just noticed that our official instructions for using categories were outdated at best, dangerously misleading at worst. I've now updated the instructions at Civilization:Community Portal, what do you think? ::Also, the Civ4 pages aren't the best place to look at when it comes to categories... The pages were imported from a separate Civilization IV Wiki, which of course did not need any disambiguation in article or category names, so that's why the pages may still carry categories like Category:Units, which shouldn't really be used for anything anymore, except maybe as a parent category for more specific subcategories. ::—ZeroOne (talk) 21:28, June 24, 2014 (UTC) :::Those instructions are much clearer than the original set. With any luck, other editors will read them and heed them so we don't wind up with a bunch of needlessly cluttered category pages. We have a huge repository of valuable information here, and it'll help everyone out if we can make it a little easier to navigate and search. :::Thanks for all you do, good sir! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:39, June 24, 2014 (UTC) Adminship nomination Hello there! I nominated you for adminship at Civilization:Requests for adminship. :) —ZeroOne (talk) 22:11, July 12, 2014 (UTC) :Well, thanks! I'll be happy to serve in whatever capacity I can. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 22:19, July 12, 2014 (UTC) ::Alright, you are now an admin! Just try to Do The Right Thing. :) —ZeroOne (talk) 21:32, July 18, 2014 (UTC) :::Congratulation. Greetings: Makarius (talk) 05:43, July 28, 2014 (UTC) ::::Thank you, thank you! I'm glad to be a (bigger) part of the team. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 18:54, July 28, 2014 (UTC) Empty BNW tabs Hello, I had just noticed you added a redundant tab to a page when I noticed that the page displayed improperly without it. This isn't because the tab there is required but instead points to an issue in the templates themselves. I'm going to assume that this issue has been there for a while and you simply added redundant tabs to the affected pages? I'm going to attempt to fix the template now so the extra tabs can be removed after that. Thanks for trying to fix the issue, in the future if you see a template related issue and you can't fix it yourself please do ask another admin. :) --Becer (talk) 18:56, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Additinal note, I have now fixed the issue that a user introduced when modifying the template. --Becer (talk) 19:02, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Yeah, I noticed the issue a couple of days ago and took it upon myself to fix it by manually adding information to the blank tabs. To be fair, a good portion of what I added was redundant, but some of my edits were made to ensure that the changes Brave New World made to the base research costs of technologies or the units/buildings that they unlock would be properly reflected in the templates. Thanks for the heads up, though...I'll be sure not to work harder than necessary to fix the next template-related issue I see. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:10, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Right as long as there's at least one difference between versions the BNW tab is definitely warranted! Keep up your great work! --Becer (talk) 19:13, July 23, 2014 (UTC) thanks :) I was wondering if you could make me a Admin? Hello my name is Jonathan and i have been editing to this wikia for a few years now and i have as many wikia points as you have. I made many new pages this this wikia over my tenure. I was wondering if you could make me a Admin? Promethius20 (talk) 08:35, October 28, 2014 (UTC) :I've seen some of your work, and it's pretty good. However, since I don't have seniority as an admin, I may not be the best person to ask about gaining administrative rights. I'll talk with the rest of the administrative staff, and if they think we need more help, I'll be sure to suggest you as a candidate. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:31, October 28, 2014 (UTC) Diseases in Mesoamerica Hello! How can I get rid of the diseases in mesoamerica? kios1949 I´m sorry, I try for the first time to communicate this way. So I surely make mistakes (still playing civ4). -Kios1949 (talk) 14:21, October 28, 2014 (UTC) :I'm not sure which game or scenario you're talking about. If you can give me more specific information, I'll see what I can do to help you. You might also try posting this question in the forum, where it's more likely to get a quick answer. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:31, October 28, 2014 (UTC) *Kios1949 Hello, again! *I was playing in CIV4 the "mesoamerica" scenario, where the spanyards come from Europe and bring the diseases to mesoamerica. This weakens the units to 20 % strength. Can I get rid of the diseases anyhow, may be by sacrifying the troups and generate new ones (or any better method)? :I've played a fair amount of Civilization IV, but I've never played that scenario, so I have to plead ignorance here. Try posting your question on the forum (which I linked to in my previous reply) and see if anyone who visits it has an answer. Sorry I can't help you more. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:18, October 30, 2014 (UTC) Maya Hi Mythril Wyrm! To make the script work for the Maya page, you must change the data in Module:Data/Civ3/Civs. This is called Lua, and User:Becer and User:ZeroOne are experts on it. Please note that List_of_civilizations_in_Civ3 will have to be changed also, if you change the database Module:Data/Civ3/Civs. Exitwound 45 (talk) 03:47, November 2, 2014 (UTC) :Thanks for the info! I'm still relatively new to this, so anything new I can learn is helpful. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:49, November 2, 2014 (UTC) Carrier Hey, sorry about that. I just recently obtained G&K and BNW, and I loaded up an old save which had the old rules, and the Civilopedia said 3 aircraft. Obviously, if I had checked a new save I would have seen the current information. HA! Anyway, I think we need tabs on all the Civ5 units and buildings like we have on the technologies to show their stats in each version of the game. What do you think? Exitwound 45 (talk) 03:17, December 22, 2014 (UTC) :No worries, man. The same change had been made by several other people, who were probably confused for the same reason that you were. :I agree that the Civ5 unit, building, and wonder templates should include the same support for vanilla, G&K, and BNW tabs that the technology template does. It would make formatting of the pages easier and reduce the likelihood of editors changing information that only applies to the most recent expansion/version of the game. I don't know very much about LUA, however, so I might not be the best person to undertake this project (though I'll be happy to help with the page revisions once the new templates are implemented). Do you know anyone who's willing and able to make the necessary changes? -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:46, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Copenhagen Hi. It seems to me we have a conundrum regarding Copenhagen. It's no longer a City-State, and therefore I think it should be removed from the associated categories. But is it still a city-state in a vanilla version of Civ5? I can't check. And there's the Civilopedia problem, as usual. Someone has added info, and I can't check it against my Civilopedia because it's gone! You thoughts? Exitwound 45 (talk) 02:29, January 19, 2015 (UTC) :I swear I remember seeing Copenhagen appear in games as a city-state prior to Denmark's introduction to Civ5 as a playable civilization, but I just started a game with both of the expansions and all of the DLC disabled and couldn't find a listing for it in Civilopedia. Sydney, however, was listed, so I guess its introduction in the patch overwrote Copenhagen entirely. :Since it originally appeared as a city-state, I would suggest keeping Copenhagen listed as such, but also keep the qualifier that it was later replaced by Sydney and became the Danish capital. Even from a game standpoint, we should try to stay historically accurate. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 04:15, January 19, 2015 (UTC) Temp Admin Hi, Mythril Wyrm! Just wanted to let you know that Josephseeley has been granted temp admin rights. He's working with us for the Fan Studio project; hopefully this will only be needed for about a month - if you've got any questions or concerns, however, don't hesitate to ask! Best regards, Raylan13 (talk) 03:15, February 18, 2015 (UTC) Stub Template Please stop putting that stub thing to the CivRev2 pages. I have the texts prepared, just need to upload them. Work for you now, more work for me later. Thank you Martin :Very good. Thanks for letting me know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 16:32, March 13, 2015 (UTC) Vandals Hey, uh, probably shouldn't block vandal's IPs for too long. IP addresses change and might be used by different people. Exitwound 45 (talk) 17:22, March 17, 2015 (UTC) :I see where you're coming from here, but when dealing with a repeat offender (e.g. someone who's made 10+ unhelpful edits in the course of a day), I lean more toward swift preventative action. If we as admins want to make it clear that we won't tolerate vandalism, we may have to mete out some harsh punishments to keep the troublemakers in line. Besides, someone who really wants to make helpful edits to the wiki and happens to share a computer with a vandal can create an account of his or her own for editing purposes. :Still, blocking 93.93.217.66 for a year may have been excessive, so I reduced the block time to three months. It should get the point across without preventing (m)any people from making legitimate edits with this IP. If you still think I'm being too strict or there's an aspect of the problem I haven't considered, please let me know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 17:46, March 17, 2015 (UTC) ::Nope, you're fine by me. I look at it this way: vandalism is gonna happen regardless, but it's pretty easy for us to fix. I think if their actions are not acknowledged and simply wiped away, it negates most of the gratification they get from it. ::I didn't know that, though: a blocked IP person can create an account to edit with. Exitwound 45 (talk) 00:22, March 18, 2015 (UTC) :::Fair enough. I'm not entirely certain if someone could create an account from a blocked IP address, but I figure that someone who really wants to contribute to the wiki could use a different computer to register and then have more freedom to edit pages. Most vandals - or at least, the ones I've seen - don't have that kind of determination. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:42, March 19, 2015 (UTC) are slashes allowed in category names? Will that cause problems? Category:Great Explorer/Industrialist (CivRev) Exitwound 45 (talk) 17:45, March 22, 2015 (UTC) :I don't think so, but I'm not completely certain. If I can find a definitive answer, I'll let you know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 18:09, March 22, 2015 (UTC) editing.... Do you ever think "My God, this wiki's a mess. How will I ever fix it all?" I do, lol. Exitwound 45 (talk) 04:07, March 24, 2015 (UTC) :Sometimes...but if the biggest problems we're trying to fix at the moment are misused categories and misdirected links, I think that speaks well of both our and our contributors' attention to detail. Positive emphasis, my good man! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 04:11, March 24, 2015 (UTC) Capital letters - the game vs English grammar rules Greetings & Salutations We de-capped the unit names as they are not proper nouns and, per normal English grammar rules, should not be capitalized in the middle of sentences. If this Wiki wants to follow the game's format, remember that the game capitalizes units when their names are labels. We don't remember seeing the names of units capitalized in the middle of sentences, but if you can, we can go along with that, but it does make this Wiki look unprofessional. (Get back with us about this, please.) DarthOrc (talk) 05:13, April 3, 2015 (UTC) :I get what you're saying here, and as someone who has a graduate degree in English literature and has tutored or taught composition for the better part of 15 years, I agree that the rules we follow are a little counter-intuitive at best. That said, I think that arguing that the game only capitalizes unit names when they're labels is arguing semantics - looking at the icons and reading the pop-up messages or some of the Historical Info sections in the Civilopedia (especially for the scenarios) will reveal that the game consistently capitalizes the significant words in the names of in-game units, whether or not they're proper nouns. It also does the same thing with words like "city" and "encampment," which I intensely dislike and have changed on several pages, so I agree that we need to make exceptions at times. :I do, however, think that we should continue to capitalize the important words in unit names. While it's not mechanically correct, it's consistent with what we see in the game and makes it easier to find references to units in the wiki articles. Besides, if we decided to strictly follow established grammar rules, we'd have to sift through hundreds - if not thousands - of articles just to re-render all of the names from the previous Civ games in lowercase. It's a lot of extra work, and it's inconsistent with both the names displayed in-game and the editorial policy this wiki's users followed while writing these articles. Even if we're not completely consistent with the games (see the "city" and "encampment" comment above), we need to be consistent with ourselves - and if you need further evidence, look at articles in other wikis for games and see how the names of in-game enemies appear. :I hope this makes sense, but feel free to ask for clarification or let me know if anyone else disagrees with this policy. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 14:51, April 3, 2015 (UTC) ::You mentioned Civilopedia - A closer look at articles in it (CivV), such as the one about the Egyptian War Chariot, shows the game uses capitals in the Strategy section but not in the History section. Again, backing up our assertaian that the use of capitals for units, etc. in the game is labeling. We feel it would be o.k. to capitalize units, etc. the 1st time they are used on a page but then allow switching to the more proper lower case afterwards. In any case, we agree that there are better things to do than to go around removing capital letters, but feel that, if we are already there, it is only being efficient to do so on that page. ::Another thing we noticed was duplicate links, which we dislike and remove.DarthOrc (talk) 05:09, April 6, 2015 (UTC) ::p.s. we hope you had a good holiday/weekend.DarthOrc (talk) 05:09, April 6, 2015 (UTC) :::For what it's worth, previously we used to follow the Wikipedia-like naming convention of writing unit, building etc names in lower case. I cannot remember how we arrived to this policy, but the discussion is probably somewhere out there. However, we (well, Becer and I at least) rediscussed the matter around the time when Beyond Earth was released and came to the conclusion that maybe it'd be the best if the page naming conventions actually followed the games' naming conventions. So as a result you'll see different conventions: the Beyond Earth articles have Title Case Names whereas older articles have sentence case names. I'm good with either option as long as there are redirects from one version of article name to the other, but nowadays I tend to agree with following the games' naming conventions. After all, for example, it's a game entity named "War Chariot" and not a historical "war chariot" that we are describing. :::—ZeroOne (talk) 19:14, April 6, 2015 (UTC) ::::Thank you. The last two sentences in particular provide a much clearer and more concise explanation of my position. ::::I'm going to second following the games' capitalization conventions when referring to in-game units, buildings, improvements, promotions, and technologies, and doing the same for new pages henceforth. I support following standard capitalization rules for game concepts and rules, but we can discuss exceptions on a case-by-case basis. ::::Simply put, I don't think we should fix something that isn't broken. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:55, April 6, 2015 (UTC) Deleting edits I know you are admin but Why are you deleting my edits it is making me mad at the Wiki -Indigo76 :While I appreciate your eagerness to contribute, it's important to ask yourself three questions before you add information to an existing wiki article: :*Am I adding important information that isn't in the article yet or makes the article easier to understand? :*Am I putting my information in the proper place? :*Does the information that I'm adding follow the mechanical (spelling, punctuation, and grammar) and formatting conventions of this wiki? :If the answer to all of those questions is "yes," go ahead and add your information; if not, it may be revised or removed by another user or admin. (For example, I undid your last two edits to the City-state (Civ5) article because they contained spelling errors and contained information that was already covered in detail later in the article. I see no reason to add this information again.) :If you want to see some pages that really need work, take a look at the lists of "wanted pages" and article stubs. All of those pages are either nonexistent or incomplete, and would benefit from expansion by you or other helpful Civilization players. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 22:06, April 20, 2015 (UTC) Civilopedias Do you like my Civilopedia template thingies? The text is somewhat protected from vandalism this way. The indentation is caused by the I left in there. It is not necessary. Do you think it looks okay? Exitwound 45 (talk) 21:06, May 16, 2015 (UTC) :I think you did a really nice job with them. They make it easier for anyone to add information to pages and more difficult for vandals to make unwanted changes. The indentation is the only thing I would suggest changing, but it's not critical by any means - it's purely cosmetic. :Just one question: is there any spacing in the Civilopedia entries for Beyond Earth, or is each section of an entry presented as a block of text? -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 22:58, May 16, 2015 (UTC) ::There are NEWLINE tags in the XML on my computer, which I changed to when I added the text to the data module on this wiki. The Civilopedia text that was added by Becer and ZeroOne had "/r/n", which refused to be handled by the wiki, so I made a substitution in my code to change them to tags, rather than go through the entire data module and change each one manually. So, in short, those entries are broken into paragraphs just like they are in the game. :) Exitwound 45 (talk) 23:11, May 16, 2015 (UTC) :::Right on, sir. Keep up the good work! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:35, May 17, 2015 (UTC) SMAC category Sorry thought they should have had the catagorie SMAC. :No biggie. Just remember that it's not necessary to add a category that's already included in another of the page's categories - for example, you don't need to add the "Civ5" category to a page that already belongs to the "Units (Civ5)" category. Cuts down on clutter that way. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 17:33, May 20, 2015 (UTC) My eyes! Good Lord, I cannot wait for them to fix the font size on Wikia! Every page looks so retarded right now! lol Exitwound 45 (talk) 02:13, May 28, 2015 (UTC) :I know what you mean. I wouldn't mind it as much if they stretched the central frame...as is, reading articles feels like trying to read a children's book. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 20:16, May 28, 2015 (UTC) ::Oh, so it isn't just me! I just sent a request for help via . I'm sure they'll fix it soon. —ZeroOne (talk) 20:38, May 28, 2015 (UTC) :::They fixed the mainpage that had layout errors, but the current font sizes are a feature rather than a bug. You can read more about the change here: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Rupert_Giles/Layout_Changes:_Breakpoints_and_Typography To summarize, they've increased the font size on largest desktop displays, i.e. for when your viewport is at least 1595 pixels wide. Feels a bit too large for me too, though. —ZeroOne (talk) 10:57, May 30, 2015 (UTC) The player Greetings & Salutations We would like to explain our editing style as well as our rationale about removing "the player" from pages. We edit on another Wiki (The Elder Scrolls Wiki), that, after discussion, decided that "the player" was 2nd person, like saying "you". For example: "If the player builds a mine" is the same as saying "If you build a mine". Since the action can be taken by other players or the game's AI, saying "you" isn't entirely correct. Therefore, using "Civilization" ("If a Civilization builds a mine"), is a more accurate description of the actual possibilities. Thus, we remove "the player" (along with any other instance of 1st or 2nd person). Since this Wiki's goal is to be a source of information for all readers, not just gamers and native American English speakers, we remove gamer terms (such as Spawn, mob, AI, etc.), slang and abbreviations. As for saying "he or she", since Shakespeare used "they" instead, we change that, as well. We hope you have a nice weekend DarthOrc (talk) 02:25, July 17, 2015 (UTC) :Fair enough. The only point I would challenge is the use of AI, which I think is commonplace enough that it's not going to confuse casual gamers (and I'm not a big fan of the term "casual," since it's often used to distinguish skilled or avid gamers from those who "have a life"). AI is also more technically accurate than "computer" and more commonly used than "NPC," though using "civilization" can often circumvent that problem. I'm not sure where other contributors stand, but they're welcome to weigh in if they choose. :Enjoy your weekend as well. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:47, July 17, 2015 (UTC) Templates Pssst. I updated the Civ4 Civ template, hehe. Exitwound 45 (talk) 01:18, September 1, 2015 (UTC) :Thanks! I'll start going through and fixing the civilization pages soon. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 01:26, September 1, 2015 (UTC) Suffixes Have you thought about what suffix would be good for the upcoming and current Rising Tide pages? Exitwound 45 (talk) 01:23, September 14, 2015 (UTC) :I can't say that I've put much thought into it, but since it's an expansion for Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth, I think we could continue to use (CivBE) for them. We don't, for example, use (Civ4W) for Civilization IV: Warlords or (Civ5BNW) for Civilization V: Brave New World, so I think the current suffix works well. If we want or need to distinguish between vanilla and Rising Tide, (CivBERT) seems like a logical choice that remains consistent with our current naming conventions. What do you think? -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 01:30, September 14, 2015 (UTC) ::It occurs to me that I used the same suffix for all the Civ3 pages, and it makes things a lot easier and simpler. The reason I thought we might want to use something different is because of pages like Landships (ESS) and Advanced Nanite Construction. But with our templates that add suffixes automatically, these pages are real problems. So perhaps we should keep it simple with (CivBE) and so on. Exitwound 45 (talk) 01:42, September 14, 2015 (UTC) :: Inaccuracy Hey Mythril Worm, Got a correction for you, the statue picture you have added for Harald Bluetooth, is in fact not a statue of Harald Bluetooth at all... It's actually "Holger Danske" you can even read the "Danske" inscribed at the bottom of the stone throne. Please see source below. https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holger_Danske https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogier_the_Dane So either rename the screenshot or remove it, cause you are missleading people with this picture. http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/File:Harald_Bluetooth_Statue.jpg Regards, Random :Thanks for pointing that out. It would seem the owner of the website from which I collected that picture was also misled. I'll take it down and see if I can find a more definitive image of Harald Bluetooth. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 12:37, October 8, 2015 (UTC) Great People from CivRev Hey Mythril Just wanna say thanks for helping out and fixing my errors! Is the stuff I'm adding to the Great People from Civilization Revolution appropiate? They all come from the Civilopedia in the game. MrGumballMachine (talk) 01:58, December 17, 2015 (UTC) :No problem! Feel free to add more such information, but watch your formatting and make sure you add an intro blurb similar to the ones I've added to the pages you edited. Also, make sure the pages have (CivRev) in their names - if you add this information to a page that was designed to be a general disambiguation page, it could confuse some of our readers. :Aside from that, it looks like you're doing good work. Keep it up! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:10, December 17, 2015 (UTC) Just starting out on the Wiki Hello, I'm a big civ fan and want to contribute to the wiki, but don't know where to start (I'm new to this wikia but not to the wikia tools or mechanics). Could you give me some pointers on what pages are in need of editing the most, or where I should focus my attention? Tybug2 (talk) 01:46, March 22, 2016 (UTC) :Certainly! You can find a list of pages the wiki needs here, and a lot of the pages related to Sid Meier's Civilization, Civilization II, Civilization Revolution 2, and Civilization: Call to Power are in need of expansion. The other admins and I can also name a few templates that the wiki needs if you have any experience creating those. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:05, March 22, 2016 (UTC) ::Sorry, I don't have much experience with templates. I know the most about civ 5 (as it is the most recent one) and some about civ rev, and not a lot about the others. I can certainly revise any of the pages for grammar, better wording, etc. but I can't fill in much core game mechanics or building costs or anything like that (but I can do all of the above for civ 5/rev) Just thought you should know my capabilities :) ::No offense, and I am new here, but how do you not have a page for research or military strength (for civ 5)? Are there just not many contributors or something? Again, no offense meant. I see your, and other admins, extensive edit count and fully respect that. ::In addition, if any other admins are offended about me coming to you first, don't be :) When I got on, you were just the one who had edited most recently and was an admin, so I figured I would send you a messege. Alos I don't mind if anyone else chips in to the discussion (that is unless you mind Mythril) Again, being new here, I have no idea what your expectations or policies are. Should I call you Mythril or Wyrm or something else entirely? (I prefer Mythril lol) ::Tybug2 (talk) 21:15, March 22, 2016 (UTC) :::I think the reason we don't have a page for research in Civilization V is because we already have a Science (Civ5) page. The same probably holds true for most of the other articles on game terms and game concepts - they don't exist because they were created under different names. You can fix the problem either by creating the page and making it redirect to the page that already exists (e.g. creating "Research (Civ5)" and redirecting it to "Science (Civ5)"), or going through and fixing the links that point to the nonexistent page. If you're more interested in writing new content than housekeeping, you can also look at the list of stub articles, add information, links, and images to these pages, and then remove the stub template. :::I definitely wouldn't worry about the other admins getting upset that you came to me first. We're a very supportive community, and all of us are ready and willing to answer questions or discuss concerns individually or cooperatively...and if we don't have an answer, we can find someone who does. I've been active on this wiki for more than a year, and I know a lot about good editing practice, but there are still quite a few things I have yet to learn. :::And Mythril is fine, thanks. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 23:09, March 22, 2016 (UTC) Noooooooo You finally got ahead of me on achievement points, dangit. Congratulations! Exitwound 45 (talk) 04:20, March 22, 2016 (UTC) :Thank you, sir! You may yet pull ahead of me again, though. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 05:12, March 22, 2016 (UTC) Game Concepts (Civ 5) clutter Hi Mythril, I'm passing through another Civ 5 period in my gaming, and that prompted me to revisit the Wiki (to which I used to contribute regularly). And I noticed that someone's been busy creating stub articles for all Social Policies and Tenets and sticking them into the Game Concepts category (page). Needless to say, the category page now looks a complete mess, and you can hardly find any relevant article among all the Social Policies there :) I've been discussing this with Becer, who generally agrees with me that Game Concepts should be reserved for large, general articles, which in turn may contain the links for sub-articles and, yes, such stubs. I think the idea behind having this Game Concepts category is to cover all aspects of the game which don't have separate links from the main page. But not crowd it with links to pages for, say, all individual Technologies, or Units. Now, I don't feel I have the right to try and fix this; and Becer thinks he's been inactive for too long to take on such a task. So, I'm asking you as an active admin.... what do you think? If you agree with me (us), we could remove the categories from the relevant pages, and probably add links to them from the Social Policies and Ideology articles. Soltan Gris 21:50, April 28, 2016 (UTC) :I'm actually the one who created those articles, which contain all of the information about each social policy and ideological tenet exactly as it appears in the in-game Civilopedia. I originally added the "Game concepts (Civ5)" category to each of them for the sake of completion (since they were closely related to the general articles), though I realize upon reflection that the "Social policies (Civ5)" and "Ideological tenets (Civ5)" categories are probably the only ones we need - no sense in bloating the "Game concepts (Civ5)" category page with peripheral articles. :Feel free to start removing the "Game concepts (Civ5)" category from these pages and adding the "Ideological tenets (Civ5)" category where appropriate. I'll also help sort this out as time permits. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:52, April 29, 2016 (UTC) :Ohhh... sorry :) But I think indeed that Game Concepts will be better off without them. So, please remind me, how do I remove Categories? I know how to add them, but the removal seems to me to be a bit of a problem... Soltan Gris 12:39, April 30, 2016 (UTC) ::No worries. I've already taken care of it, but removing categories generally involves opening the page in source mode and deleting the categories that don't belong. (Look for "Category:X" with two brackets before it and after it, and delete that.) Keep in mind that some categories are added automatically by a template on the page, so you'll either have to remove or revise the template if the page was incorrectly categorized. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 13:20, April 30, 2016 (UTC) Article version selector Does the selector/tabber thing at the top of Social policies (Civ5) work for you? It does not work for me; I cannot click it. If I view the page in the edit history in comparison mode, then it is functional. Very puzzling. Exitwound 45 (talk) 03:21, April 30, 2016 (UTC) :I haven't had any luck with it, either. I'm hoping ZeroOne or Becer can shed some light on the problem. Thanks Ha, I can't believe I wrote IV when I was supposed to write VI! :D Thanks for fixing it. And hey, shoot me a Steam friend request, please (or remind me of your Steam nickname if we are already friends!). There's a link to my profile on my user page. —ZeroOne (talk) 22:18, May 11, 2016 (UTC) :No worries, good sir! Even the best of us make mistakes from time to time. I haven't had much time for gaming lately on account of work and side projects, but I sent you a friend request and will be happy to do some gaming with you when we find a time and game that works for both of us. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:01, May 12, 2016 (UTC) Planning for Civ6 Hello Mythril, you're a very active admin on here so I'd really appreciate it if you could take some times to give everyone your thoughts on what we should do leading up to the release of Civilization VI : http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:33778#3 We need all the input we can get, and I definitely wouldn't want you to be ignored. --Becer (talk) 20:37, May 14, 2016 (UTC) Discussion Hey pal, please check this out: Thread:34064. Exitwound 45 (talk) 00:02, June 14, 2016 (UTC) :Fair point. I went through and revised all of the overview pages for capitals that didn't have dedicated articles for each game. No sense in encouraging people to create short, minimally informative or useful articles. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 00:57, June 14, 2016 (UTC) JoeBot Hey buddy, these changes concern me: *Sea Dragon It's a fictional word, and I think it should have two "L"s. *Moroccan, Resource, Resource (Civ4) Any adjective combo can be hyphenated as the writer sees fit, correct? *Probably more I don't know a thing about bots. Can they be programmed not to edit Civilopedia entries? Exitwound 45 (talk) 22:54, August 8, 2016 (UTC) :Sorry for the delayed response. I'm with you on not changing the spelling of fictional words, but I'm okay with fixing spelling or grammatical errors in the Civilopedia Entry/Historical Info sections, as long as we follow a consistent set of rules. :The way I learned it, adjective pairs should not be hyphenated unless they include "well" and come before the word they modify - for example, you could say "That civilization has a well-trained army," or "That civilization's army is well trained." (This site and this site provide a more specific set of rules.) That said, I'm not sure if American English and British English punctuation rules are the same, and I don't know how many other wiki users are likely to notice or complain about it. :I don't know anything about bots either, so we might want to ask Becer or ZeroOne about programming them not to edit certain sections of a page. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 20:07, August 20, 2016 (UTC) ::About Colossus, 1 L is the proper spelling but I always favor (within the realm of the possible) the in-game spelling. This being said this doesn't seem to concern an actual in-game object. ::About bots, not all of that user's edits were bot edits, the ones that were bot edits seem fine to me, they're staff and its impossible to blanket-ban bot users in general. We can ask people not to use bots (don't see a reason to do that) or ban abusers (we can already do that). --Becer (talk) 20:24, August 20, 2016 (UTC) Civ5 Social Policy pages Hey Mythril! I saw your edits and I agree. I went a bit beyond and re-formulated a bit the Game Info section to be a bit more specific. Could you take a look and see if you like it like that? Thanks! Soltan Gris 00:40, August 25, 2016 (UTC) :I think it's better to leave the intro and Game Info sections on these pages as they currently are - it's truer to how they're displayed in the game. If you'd like to provide more specific information in a Strategy section for each article, go right ahead. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 00:43, August 25, 2016 (UTC)